04.05.2015 Views

Sharon-Weinberger-In.. - American Antigravity

Sharon-Weinberger-In.. - American Antigravity

Sharon-Weinberger-In.. - American Antigravity

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

interest in nuclear isomers, and the specific 1998 results that sparked the debate over the<br />

“hafnium bomb.” What is primarily at issue in my book is an experiment conducted in 1998 that<br />

led a scientist in Texas to claim he had “triggered” the hafnium isomer (hafnium-178m2) using<br />

photons from a dental X-ray machine. Those results could not be reproduced by independent<br />

researchers, and the initial claims violated some laws of physics. However, this does not cover<br />

the entire range of isomer physics, just the specific idea of a nuclear hand grenade based on the<br />

hafnium isomer.<br />

AAG: <strong>In</strong> "The Social Life of <strong>In</strong>formation", Brown & Duguid made an excellent point that<br />

technology stories like the hafnium-bomb or even the Philadelphia Experiment are part of an<br />

oral-tradition that's an ingrained part of the engineering & defense culture. They believe that<br />

stories like this stick around because they contain inherent information value, but that like any<br />

metaphorical tale, the information is often seriously diluted & misinterpreted over time. Any<br />

thoughts on how this might affect these "cutting-edge" technologies as they filter up from the<br />

engineering to the administrative levels in industry & government?<br />

<strong>Weinberger</strong>: I love that idea, truly. Oral<br />

traditions are a wonderful thing, and you may well<br />

be right about how those work. <strong>In</strong> a sense, the<br />

isomer bomb has been one of those stories: every<br />

few years nuclear weapons scientists would say,<br />

“Hey, wouldn’t isomers make for a great bomb?”<br />

Then the scientists would discuss it, realize the<br />

limitations, and (usually) move on.<br />

But the hafnium bomb should not be equated with<br />

all isomer research. That would be unfortunate.<br />

The idea is not to discourage truly forward thinking<br />

ideas, but to ensure that the ideas we do fund are<br />

grounded in reality (and science). I do hope the<br />

hafnium bomb becomes a reminder of why you<br />

don’t want to go off the deep end.<br />

Carl Collins: The hafnium researcher in his<br />

laboratory at the University of Texas.<br />

AAG: I'd like to broaden our scope just a bit from the book itself to some examples<br />

throughout the defense-industry. First, I'd like to touch on what I call "me too" technologies,<br />

which I guess would include Darpa's massive push towards <strong>In</strong>formation Technology solutions<br />

for any and every problem they come up against. They invented the internet, and IT certainly<br />

offers flashy solutions, but do you think that they're over-investing in IT simply because it gets<br />

them publicity to push initiatives in this area?<br />

<strong>Weinberger</strong>: Every DARPA director wants a legacy. I’ve heard, very second-hand, that<br />

the current director wants it to be cognitive computing, and DARPA has put a lot of investment<br />

into that area. At the same time, the New York Times ran an article some time back on DARPA’s<br />

cutbacks on university funding for IT. I can’t say which areas are over or under-invested in---I<br />

simply haven’t looked at the budget in that sort of detail. Though I’m sometimes critical of<br />

DARPA, I think its portfolio is likely balanced to reflect the current exigencies of war, and that<br />

may be quite reasonable.<br />

AAG: Speaking of which, the mother of all over-hyped "me too" technologies these days is<br />

nanotechnology. I probably don't even need to list examples (MIT's nanotech armor), but I<br />

should point out that the fundamental basis for Drexlerian nanotechnology - the nanoassembler<br />

- is still decades away from being a reality. Is nanotech a defense-industry example<br />

<strong>American</strong> <strong>Antigravity</strong>.Com Page 4 of 11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!